Answering Clarke's of Nov. 15, Merrick suggests that Clarke see in the "Mirror" the proceedings and the reception given to the Plenary Council by the citizens of Baltimore. The scope of the task assigned to Merrick by his bishop on that occasion did not admit of any allusion to the special topics mentioned in Clarke's note. In fact he had no opportunity for any personal conference which would enable him to discuss such matters with any member of the Council. Some of the irregularities mentioned in Clarke's letter were unknown and undreamt of until he was advised of them. Such things ought to be remedied by the bishops of Clarke's Diocese. Merrick is quite confident that they have not been indulged in, in this state. The opinion of Judge Roger B. Taney and others to which Clarke alluded, Merrick has never seen, but he understands that it was directed chiefly to the provisions of the Bill of Rights of Maryland and, as a result of that opinion, the act of 1832 was passed making the Archbishops of Baltimore a corporation sole with power to take and hold the property of the different Churches for their appropriate objects. :: I-2-n A.L.S. 2pp. 8vo.